1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to media asset groups and, more particularly, to rating media asset groups or media assets therein.
2. Description of the Related Art
Currently, many media management applications, such as the iTunes™ application, produced by Apple Inc. of Cupertino, Calif., offer ways to rate media assets. For example, iTunes™ allows media assets to be rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the highest rating.
Media assets can include any and all kinds of digital media formats, such as audio files (e.g., MP3, AAC, Ogg Vorbis, etc.) or video files (e.g., QuickTime®, AVI). Media assets collections can include any collection of media assets, such as music albums, and music compilations. Another example of a media asset collection is known as a playlist, which can pertain to a group of audio tracks.
However, current methods of rating media assets depend on intensive user input. Typically, a user must rate each individual media asset in his or her collection separately, which can be time-consuming, especially for large groups of media assets. Thus, there is a need for improved approaches to rate media assets.
The invention pertains to improved techniques for rating media assets or media asset groups (i.e., collection of media assets). In one embodiment, ratings of media assets within a media asset group can be used to automatically determine a rating applied to the media asset group. For example, one or more ratings assigned to one or more songs on an album can be used to determine a rating for the entire album. In another embodiment, a rating of a media asset group can be used to automatically determine a rating for one or more of the media assets in the media asset group.
The invention can be implemented in numerous ways, including as a method, system, device, or apparatus (including computer readable medium or graphical user interface). Several embodiments of the invention are discussed below.
As a computer-implemented method for assigning ratings to media assets, one embodiment of the invention includes at least the act of determining a rating for an unrated media asset collection based on the user-ratings of one or more user-rated media assets in the media asset collection.
As a media management system, one embodiment of the invention includes at least a rating module. The rating module can, for example, be configured to (i) determine a rating for a user-unrated media asset collection based on prior user ratings of one or more of the media assets in the media asset collection; and (ii) determine a rating for one or more user-unrated media assets in a user-rated media asset collection based on the user-rating of the user-rated media asset collection.
As a computer-implemented method for assigning ratings to media assets, one embodiment of the invention includes at least: receiving a user collection rating for a collection including a plurality of tracks; and assigning the user collection rating to those of the tracks within the collection that have not been previously user-rated.
As a computer readable medium including at least executable computer program code tangibly stored thereon for assigning ratings to media assets, one embodiment of the invention includes at least: computer program code for receiving a user collection rating for a collection including a plurality of tracks; computer program code for assigning the user collection rating to those of the tracks within the collection that have not been previously user-rated; computer program code for receiving a user track rating associated with a particular one of the tracks; computer program code for assigning the user track rating to the particular one of the tracks; computer program code for determining whether the collection has been previously user-rated; computer program code for determining a computed track rating based on the tracks of the collection that have been previously rated by the user; and computer program code for assigning the computed track rating to the collection as a calculated collection rating if the collection is determined not to have been previously user-rated.
Other aspects and advantages of the invention will become apparent from the following detailed description taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings which illustrate, by way of example, the principles of the invention.
The invention will be readily understood by the following detailed description in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, wherein like reference numerals designate like structural elements, and in which:
The invention pertains to improved techniques for rating media assets or media asset groups (i.e., collection of media assets). In one embodiment, ratings of media assets within a media asset group can be used to automatically determine a rating applied to the media asset group. For example, one or more ratings assigned to one or more songs on an album can be used to determine a rating for the entire album. In another embodiment, a rating of a media asset group can be used to automatically determine a rating for one or more of the media assets in the media asset group.
Embodiments of the invention are discussed below with reference to
A computer program 108, typically a media management application (MMA) or other media player application runs on the client device 104. One example of a media management application is the iTunes™ application, produced by Apple Inc. of Cupertino, Calif. The client devices 104 are, in general, computing devices. As an example, the client devices 104 can be specific or general-purpose personal computers or portable media players. One example of a portable media player suitable for use with the invention is the iPod™, also produced by Apple Inc. The computer program 108 can be used by a consumer for a variety of purposes, including, but not limited to, browsing and/or purchasing media assets from the on-line media store provided by the media store server 102, creating and sharing media asset groups (e.g., playlists), organizing media assets, presenting/playing media assets, and transferring media assets between client devices 104.
The media purchase system 100 also includes a digital asset manager 114. The digital asset manager 114 is coupled to a media assets database 116. The media assets database 116 stores media asset information including metadata relating to digital media assets available for purchase at the on-line media store. The metadata can pertain to individual media assets (digital media assets) or media asset groups (digital media asset groups). Media assets can include, but are not limited to, music, video, text, and/or graphics files. In the case of music, a media asset group can be a playlist for the music.
The media store server 102 enables the user of a particular client device 104 to purchase media assets (e.g., songs, videos, albums). Subsequently, the client device 104 can download the purchased media assets from the media store server 102, or some other server, via the data network 106. As will be understood by those familiar with data networks, other network configurations are possible. Furthermore, while the media store server 102 and the digital asset manager 114 are shown as individual and separate devices, it will be understood by those familiar with the art that other configurations are possible. As one example, each device can be implemented such that it is distributed over multiple server computers. As another example, these various servers and/or managers can be implemented by a single physical server computer.
The media asset rating calculation process 200 can be used to calculate ratings for unrated media assets if a user has entered a rating for any media asset collection to which the media assets belong. For example, if a user rates a music album, all unrated album tracks on that album can receive the same rating that the album received. Alternately, if a media asset collection is unrated, but individual media assets that belong to that media asset collection receive user ratings, then a media asset collection rating can be calculated for that media asset collection based on the average ratings of individual media assets in the media asset collection. For example, if a user rates album tracks on an album, the album will receive a rating based on the average of the ratings of all the user-rated album tracks. Thus, in this embodiment, the ratings of media assets without user-ratings are not considered in the calculation.
In one embodiment of the invention, user-ratings are given priority over ratings calculated using the media asset calculation process 200. According to this embodiment, user-ratings can be used to calculate ratings for unrated media assets, but calculated ratings are used to overwrite prior user-ratings. For example, if a music album has a user-rating (i.e., has been rated by a user), rating individual album tracks in the album will not affect the user album rating. Conversely, if any album tracks on an album have user-ratings, then rating the album will not affect any of the user album track ratings.
The media asset rating calculation process 200 begins with a decision 201 which detects when an album has received a user-rating. When decision 201 detects that an album has received a user-rating, that user-rating is assigned 211 to that album and the media asset rating calculation process 200 continues to decision 213. The decision 213 determines if any of the album tracks on the album lack user-ratings. Any album tracks without user ratings can then be assigned 215 the same user-rating that was assigned 211 to the album. If decision 213 determines that none of the album tracks are unrated, then the media asset rating calculation process 200 returns to decision 201 and subsequent blocks.
On the other hand, if decision 201 does not detect that an album has received a user-rating, then a decision 203 can check if an album track has received a user-rating. If so, then the user-rating can be assigned 205 to the album track and the media asset rating calculation process 200 continues to decision 207. Alternately, if the decision 203 determines that no album track has received a user rating, then media asset rating calculation process 200 returns to decision 201 and subsequent blocks.
Once the user album track rating has been assigned 205, the media asset rating calculation process 200 continues to decision 207, which determines if the album has previously been assigned a user-rating. If not, then the album can be assigned 209 a user album rating, which is calculated using any existing user track ratings. In one embodiment of the invention, the user album rating is calculated by taking the mean (i.e., average) of the ratings of all user-rated album tracks in the album. If, on the other hand, decision 207 determines that the album has previously been assigned a user album rating, then the media asset rating calculation process 200 continues to decision 201 and subsequent blocks.
In one embodiment of the invention, media assets are rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the highest rating. In this rating system, a rating of zero indicates no rating. One example of a media asset rating system is found in the iTunes™ application, produced by Apple Inc. of Cupertino, Calif.
Interspaced with the album rating states are time snapshots of hypothetical user interactions with a user-rating system, in this case a system where a user rates media assets on a scale of one to four stars. Ratings are shown as a series of stars located next to either ALBUM or one of its tracks. Further, in example 200, solid black stars indicate user-ratings while white stars indicate calculated ratings.
As noted above, at time T0, ALBUM has not yet been rated, thus no ratings are shown. At T1 a user enters a rating of two stars for Track_2. Next, at time T2, ALBUM receives a calculated rating of two stars, shown as white stars to indicate that the rating is calculated rather than entered by a user. In this case, the album rating is based solely on the two star user track rating of two stars given to Track_2. The ratings of Track_1 and Track_3 do not count when calculating the albums calculated rating since neither has received a user-rating yet.
At time T3 a user enters a rating of four stars for Track_3. At time T4 ALBUM receives a new calculated rating of three stars, based on the average of the ratings for Track_2 and Track_3.
At time T5 a user enters a rating of one star for ALBUM. At this point the rating for ALBUM becomes a user-rating rather than a calculated rating and is will no longer be calculated when user album track ratings are changed. However, at time T6, album track Track_1 receives a calculated rating of one star, equal to the user-rating given to ALBUM.
At time T7, the rating for Track_2 is changed from two to three stars. However, as shown at time T8, the re-rating of Track_2 does not affect the user album rating given to ALBUM, since ALBUM's album user-rating overrides the calculated rating of three stars that would display if ALBUM had not had an user album rating.
At time T9, ALBUM receives a new rating of three stars. At time T10, the rating of Track_1, which has not yet received a user track rating, is recalculated and adjusted to three stars to match the user album rating.
At time T11, the user rates track Track_1, giving it two stars. At T11 the album and all album tracks have received user ratings. As discussed above, in Example 2, user-ratings take priority over calculated ratings. Thus, beginning at time T11, no new ratings will be calculated, although a user may re-rate the album or album tracks manually if desired.
The various aspects, features, embodiments or implementations of the invention described above can be used alone or in various combinations.
The invention is preferably implemented by software, hardware, or a combination of hardware and software. The invention can also be embodied as computer readable code on a computer readable medium. The computer readable medium is any data storage device that can store data which can thereafter be read by a computer system. Examples of the computer readable medium generally include read-only memory and random-access memory. More specific examples of computer readable medium include Flash memory, EEPROM memory, memory card, CD-ROM, DVD, hard drive, magnetic tape, optical data storage device, and carrier wave. The computer readable medium can also be distributed over network-coupled computer systems so that the computer readable code is stored and executed in a distributed fashion.
The invention is preferably implemented by software, hardware, or a combination of hardware and software. The invention can also be embodied as computer readable code on a computer readable medium. The computer readable medium is any data storage device that can store data which can thereafter be read by a computer system. Examples of the computer readable medium generally include read-only memory and random-access memory. More specific examples of computer readable medium are tangible and include Flash memory, EEPROM memory, memory card, CD-ROM, DVD, hard drive, magnetic tape, and optical data storage device. The computer readable medium can also be distributed over network-coupled computer systems so that the computer readable code is stored and executed in a distributed fashion.
The many features and advantages of the present invention are apparent from the written description. Further, since numerous modifications and changes will readily occur to those skilled in the art, the invention should not be limited to the exact construction and operation as illustrated and described. Hence, all suitable modifications and equivalents may be resorted to as falling within the scope of the invention.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3990710 | Hughes | Nov 1976 | A |
4528643 | Freeny, Jr. | Jul 1985 | A |
4851931 | Parker et al. | Jul 1989 | A |
5168481 | Culbertson et al. | Dec 1992 | A |
5181107 | Rhoades | Jan 1993 | A |
5191573 | Hair | Mar 1993 | A |
5341350 | Frank et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5355302 | Martin et al. | Oct 1994 | A |
5418713 | Allen | May 1995 | A |
5428735 | Kahl et al. | Jun 1995 | A |
5459824 | Kashiwazaki | Oct 1995 | A |
5481509 | Knowles | Jan 1996 | A |
5504852 | Thompson-Rohrlich | Apr 1996 | A |
5559945 | Beaudet et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5561604 | Buckley et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5566353 | Cho et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5583993 | Foster et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
5587404 | Kroner et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
5616876 | Cluts | Apr 1997 | A |
5633839 | Alexander et al. | May 1997 | A |
5640566 | Victor et al. | Jun 1997 | A |
5666530 | Clark et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5710922 | Alley et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5714971 | Shalit et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
5721949 | Smith et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
5726909 | Krikorian | Mar 1998 | A |
5727202 | Kucala | Mar 1998 | A |
5734823 | Saigh et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5739451 | Winksy et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5740134 | Peterson | Apr 1998 | A |
5819160 | Foladare et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5835721 | Donahue et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5835732 | Kikinis et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5845282 | Alley et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5864868 | Contois | Jan 1999 | A |
5875110 | Jacobs | Feb 1999 | A |
5897642 | Capossela et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5918213 | Bernard et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5918303 | Yamaura et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5923757 | Hocker et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5925843 | Miller et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5926819 | Doo et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5963916 | Kaplan | Oct 1999 | A |
5969283 | Looney et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5983069 | Cho et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5995098 | Okada et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6000000 | Hawkins et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6006274 | Hawkins et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6038199 | Pawlowski et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6041023 | Lakhansingh | Mar 2000 | A |
6052797 | Ofek et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6061306 | Buchheim | May 2000 | A |
6125369 | Wu et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6172948 | Keller et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6208044 | Viswanadham et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6216131 | Liu et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6243328 | Fenner et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6243725 | Hempleman et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6247135 | Feague | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6248946 | Dwek | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6255961 | Van Rzin et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6272545 | Flanagin et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6283764 | Kajiyama et al. | Sep 2001 | B2 |
6295541 | Bodnar et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6332175 | Birrell et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6341316 | Kloba et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6356971 | Katz et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6380947 | Stead | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6389467 | Eyal | May 2002 | B1 |
6407750 | Gioscia et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6434680 | Belknap et al. | Aug 2002 | B2 |
6446080 | Van Ryzin et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6452609 | Katinsky et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6453281 | Walters et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6490432 | Wegener et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6493758 | McLain | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6523124 | Lunsford et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6529804 | Draggon et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6563769 | Van Der Meulen | May 2003 | B1 |
6587403 | Keller et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6587404 | Keller et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6621768 | Keller et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6636873 | Carini et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6664981 | Ashe et al. | Dec 2003 | B2 |
6665803 | Lunsford et al. | Dec 2003 | B2 |
6718348 | Novak et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6721489 | Benyamin et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6731312 | Robbin | May 2004 | B2 |
6760721 | Chasen et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
6763345 | Hempleman et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
6779019 | Mousseau et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6785542 | Blight et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6794566 | Pachet | Sep 2004 | B2 |
6801964 | Mahdavi | Oct 2004 | B1 |
6874037 | Abram et al. | Mar 2005 | B1 |
6928433 | Goodman et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6933433 | Porteus et al. | Aug 2005 | B1 |
6941324 | Plastina et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
6978127 | Bulthuis et al. | Dec 2005 | B1 |
6987221 | Platt | Jan 2006 | B2 |
7003495 | Burger et al. | Feb 2006 | B1 |
7043477 | Mercer et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7055165 | Connelly | May 2006 | B2 |
7111009 | Gupta et al. | Sep 2006 | B1 |
7117516 | Khoo et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7126770 | Arai et al. | Oct 2006 | B1 |
7171557 | Kallahalla et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7209633 | Novak et al. | Apr 2007 | B1 |
7228298 | Raines | Jun 2007 | B1 |
7272385 | Mirouze et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7478323 | Dowdy | Jan 2009 | B2 |
7502626 | Lemilainen | Mar 2009 | B1 |
7797446 | Heller et al. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
20010004310 | Kono | Jun 2001 | A1 |
20010011308 | Clark et al. | Aug 2001 | A1 |
20010021053 | Colbourne et al. | Sep 2001 | A1 |
20010041021 | Boyle et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20010044835 | Schober et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20010048642 | Berhan | Dec 2001 | A1 |
20010052123 | Kawai | Dec 2001 | A1 |
20020002413 | Tokue | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020010788 | Nathan et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020013784 | Swanson | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020015161 | Haneda et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020016968 | Nathan et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020027561 | Wu | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020046315 | Miller et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020054079 | Russel | May 2002 | A1 |
20020055934 | Lipscomb et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020073167 | Powell et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020080180 | Mander et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020116082 | Gudorf | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020118300 | Middleton et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020133515 | Kagle et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020138606 | Robison | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020152278 | Pontenzone et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020161865 | Nguyen | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020174269 | Spurgat et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020193895 | Qian et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20020194195 | Fenton et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20020194309 | Carter et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030013493 | Irimajiri et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030014767 | Stumphauzer | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030030733 | Seaman et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030037254 | Fischer et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030046434 | Flanagin et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030050058 | Walsh et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030055723 | English | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030074457 | Kluth | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030079038 | Robbin et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030081784 | Kallahalla et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030093340 | Krystek et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030098893 | Makinen | May 2003 | A1 |
20030107585 | Samuelson | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030112279 | Irimajiri | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030149628 | Abbosh et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030167318 | Robbin et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030174882 | Turpin et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030182315 | Plastina et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030191756 | Oh | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030206203 | Ly | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030210821 | Yogeshwar et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030221541 | Platt | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040001395 | Keller et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040001396 | Keller et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040017997 | Cowgill | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040027930 | Kudo | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040054542 | Foote et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040055446 | Robbin et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040071922 | McCarthy et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040076086 | Keller | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040083480 | Dodge | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040093274 | Vanska et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040103102 | Nelson | May 2004 | A1 |
20040113915 | Ohtsuki et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040123242 | McKibben | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040123725 | Kim | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040128277 | Mander et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040139180 | White et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040148358 | Singh et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040164991 | Rose | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040205028 | Verosub et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040223245 | Morohashi | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040225762 | Poo | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040261064 | Goldstein et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050031197 | Knopp | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050055718 | Stone | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050060264 | Schrock et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050080915 | Shoemaker | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050141771 | Yamakado et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050149392 | Gold et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050235015 | Abanami et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050240494 | Cue et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050240661 | Heller et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050249080 | Foote et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050262528 | Herley | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050267803 | Patel et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050278377 | Mirrashidi et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060015378 | Mirrashidi et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060036567 | Tan | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060066627 | Gerhard et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060089949 | Robbin | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060100978 | Heller et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060156236 | Heller et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060156239 | Jobs | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060163358 | Biderman | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060168340 | Heller et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060247980 | Mirrashidi et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20080256378 | Guillorit | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20090063496 | Cunningham et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
0 917 077 | May 1999 | EP |
0 982 732 | Mar 2000 | EP |
1 028 425 | Aug 2000 | EP |
1 548 740 | Jun 2005 | EP |
2000-339917 | Dec 2000 | JP |
2001-76465 | Mar 2001 | JP |
2001-93226 | Apr 2001 | JP |
2001-117800 | Apr 2001 | JP |
2001291365 | Oct 2001 | JP |
200274909 | Mar 2002 | JP |
WO 9516950 | Jun 1995 | WO |
WO 0133569 | May 2001 | WO |
WO 0167753 | Sep 2001 | WO |
WO 0225610 | Mar 2002 | WO |
WO 0225935 | Mar 2002 | WO |
WO 03023786 | Mar 2003 | WO |
WO 2004-004338 | Jan 2004 | WO |
WO 2004084413 | Sep 2004 | WO |
2005073856 | Aug 2005 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20090063543 A1 | Mar 2009 | US |